03/24/2010 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Malone asked the variety of the juniper being used and Mr. McGettrick said the juniper would be a 1%z caliper but did not know the variety. Mr. Malone asked the arborvitae variety which was not known either. He requested the scientific names of all plants be listed. The purpose of this type of planting is to create a vegetative wall between the people inside and outside of the patio. He is looking for upright evergreens with flowering plants surrounding them and each planter should be the same. He aslced if the houses surrounding the site were being used as homes or retail business. Ms. Wenger said abutting side lots and those across the street are zoned retail and rear abutting lots are residential. The commission asked for a more detailed site plan showing the entire lot and abutting lots. Mr. Parry said there were two dumpsters in the broken enclosure and four additional dumpsters scattered across the baclc of the plaza. The plans submitted show no plans for the dumpsters or enclosures. This should be included on future plans. It looks as if there are two parcels involved in the site which includes a house to the east. Mr. McGettrick said there is only one parcel and the plan only shows the area being addressed not the entire lot. Mr. Parry said the plan will increase the traffic flow along the east side of the building and the plans do not show the width of the drive which is relevant to determining circulation. The east drive is lined with railroad ties instead of curbing which should be installed. He suggested a site survey be submitted so the commission has an accurate understanding of the site. If there is more than one building on the parcel both should be shown. Mr. Cotner questioned if thought was given to having the patio along the back of the building and Ms. Wenger said the proximity to the residents would be more intrusive along the back. The commission can make recommendations on the variances required but it is evident that the commission requires more detailed information and the Safety Department can be asked to submit a report on the accessibility of the site. Mrs. Meredith asked how many accessible spaces were required for the site as one of the two existing spaces is being removed and only one is shown on the plan. Mr. Mitchell said two are required for the site. Mrs. Meredith read two letters to the commission from abutting residents for the record. Both letters expressed concerns regarding noise levels in the summer months and are against any addition that would enhance the outdoor noise levels. Mr. Rerlco said that the homes are more than 200 feet away from the site and complaining about noise levels without a patio. Mrs. Meredith questioned if there were currently patrons standing outdoors in the back smoking and congregating or if the back door was being propped open in the evenings. Mr. Rerko said the rear doors should remain closed at all times. Mrs. Meredith aslced if the egress to the patio is through the bar only and Mr. McGettrick said the liquor board said all gates had to be removed from the patio so it is only fenced on three sides, the sidewalk will not be gated or blocked it will remain open. Mr. Parry asked for a copy of the letter from the liquor board stating the sidewallc had to remain open and the patio is not to be enclosed. Mrs. Meredith moved, seconded by Mr. Malone, to recommend the Board of Zoning Appeals grant CMS10-10: Stop on Inn of 29352 Lorain ltoad the following variances: 1. A 25 foot variance for business activity within required 75 foot front building setback 2. A 25 foot variance for a fence constructed within front yard setback. Roll call: Parry, Malone, Cotner -no; Meredith, Bohlmann, Rerko - yes; motion failed 3-3. Mrs. Meredith moved seconded by Mr. Bohlmann, to table CMS10-10: Stop on Inn of 7